Hydroxychloroquine Still Doesn’t Do Anything, New Data Shows

ld like to take the time to thank you asabuvsobelow for all your hard word and all you,ve done up till now and will do in the future during this crisis, thats what nice people do, Ignore the snark and snash givers, and the Hydroxy troll ,. you,ll feel better for it, My Gran always had a saying that i,ve held with me for over 50 years , Its nice to be nice , it doesnt cost you a penny , some people want to take a long hard look in the mirror at themselves, or maybe not, they,ll probably like what they see

a reply to: TheRedneck

you're becoming pathetic

Which I've heard you say for the nth time on here.

You're far too sensitive about your position and status on here Redneck. I couldn't care less if you thought you were a Prince of England. What matters in the end is that you provide the facts, the references from the experts deeply involved in these matters. The ones with their credentials on the line in public, not hiding behind a computer screen name ya know? Yet you continue to push them aside, the NIH, The WHO, Fauci, Birx, and insist you yourself know best because, well, you have your own little science hobbies. You expect to be taken seriously in light of all this. You need to understand that's not the way it works outside these forum walls.

a reply to: themove1904

And I'd like to second that post.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Southern Guardian

OK, keep replaying the same old material. I can ignore you as surely as I can ignore Phage.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

I can ignore you as surely as I can ignore Phage.

Didn't you claim I wasn't worth your time 16 literal pages ago on this very thread? And yet you still take the bite and reply? Same constant excuses.

Yes, you're not qualified to make a judgement call on whether or not HCQ is an effective treatment to COVID19. It's as simple as that. If you well and truly believe in it's effectiveness, refer to the relevant studies with actual outcomes, actual translations from the experts. Not too out there to ask for right?

a reply to: Southern Guardian

Speaking of translations, have you worked out how to get your browser to decode French yet?

That reporter used real experts to answer some of your questions and shed doubt on some shady practices in statistical data reporting.

It's criminal that the Left is still fighting against this drug. Getting people killed just to spite Trump. You people are sick.

a reply to: face23785

The left is losing the battle, pharmacies around the country are about to triple their supply in Hydroxychloroquine.

originally posted by: puzzled2
a reply to: Phage

People die with and without the treatment
So while you stand there wondering what to do with you hands in your pockets. waiting for the FDA to call and tell you...

They try something - it works, try it again it works again repeat and build up the information gather the information.

As asabuvsobelow said it is individualized treatments so risks or known issues will be taken in to consideration.

80% don't have symptoms
12% have mild
8% end up in hospital.
Over s 1200+ trials are being done based on people trying and having a success and replicating it.
You can't wait for an idea to form, get funding, get a trial going and do the analysis then sell the result to the most interested party during a pandemic.

To many people will die. I assume you don't want that but do you have an alternative to an extended lock downs or trying treatments?

Me - Try the treatment - try the mask, Try the face goggles, try the herd immunity but don't expect a wonder new drug any time soon.

Excellent post
Excellent Points
Excellent Logic

What is everyone so afraid of with HydroxyChloroquine ? People are dying we are trying to save them . Are you afraid the medication will put a dent in the Nightly MSM death Count?

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: themove1904

And I'd like to second that post.

TheRedneck

Ty both for your support.

a reply to: puzzled2

His browser will work just fine if he tries it on an article he can spin to his agenda.

It's not the browser that is malfunctioning.

TheRedneck

Let be just comment, it's nice for you guys to be there for one another. What better way than to fondle each other's ego's to reinforce your engrained beliefs. It really gives that false sense of security that you can do no wrong. Amusing.

a reply to: puzzled2

Speaking of translations, have you worked out how to get your browser to decode French yet?

Google translate worked this time around. There were issues with getting it to function prior.

No biggie.

That reporter used real experts to answer some of your questions

Just to confirm, your source is FranceSoir

FranceSoir is a tabloit newspaper and has posted controversial articles in the past, some labelled anti-islamic. It has strong ties to the Moscow News:

the Tribunal of Commerce in Lille announced that the paper would become the property of Jean-Pierre Brunois, a real-estate developer, and Olivier Rey, a former journalist for the paper.[10] The tribunal had been overseeing the bankruptcy and bids for take over since October 2005, at which point the circulation had dropped to around 50,000. The decision lead to strike by the staff who were displeased with Brunois' plan to cut costs by firing many, and increase circulation by turning the paper into a tabloid. One of the opposing bids, favored by the staff, was from Arkadi Gaydamak, the owner of The Moscow News,

The actual paper is just an opinion piece labelled as a 'Whitepaper'. It's not based on any substantiated studies on HCQ and it's actual effectiveness against COVID-19. Rather, the author, Simone Gold relies on the long standing effectiveness of HCQ on other ailements to point to it as effective. She doesn't refer to any actual substantive studies proving this, rather, her view of HCQ's reliable use should mean it should be effective. Again, no substantive studies pointed to that this drug does work, just her opinion.

For those of you unfamiliar with Dr Simone Gold, she was part of that Dr's frontline group that came to public attention to promote HCQ as a viable treatment against COVID19. The group claimed they had tested the drug on 200+ patients and proclaimed it's positive effectiveness. To date, they have yet to actually releaste their findings and Dr Simone Gold was subsequently fired by the hospital she worked for. She's no seeking donations.

Simone Gold, the author referenced, standing here behind the lead Dr of that group, Stella Immanuel. Link leads to a thread on them:



Dr. Simone Gold

Gold has been a regular on the right-wing media circuit during the pandemic, appearing on Fox News on May 21, arguing that patients are being harmed by the shutdowns taking place across the country.

Gold also appeared on PragerU’s YouTube channel back in May, insisting that more people will die from the lockdowns than from the coronavirus pandemic, and has done YouTube videos for the Tea Party Patriots Foundation, the nonprofit co-founded by Jenny Beth Martin. (Gizmodo reached out to Simone Gold for comment.)

Gold, who appears to be a co-organiser of the Beverly Hills Conservative Club

More nonsense as usual.

Waiting for the next post.

a reply to: Phage

Phage.... I'm ganna need ya to hit me with one of your reality checks. Scare me a little. I don't feel like I'm getting much of a challenge from these guys.

Do not use hydroxychloroquine for COVID: National Taskforce (Australia)

Associate Professor Julian Elliott, Executive Director of the National COVID-19 Clinical Evidence Taskforce, said the evidence indicates hydroxychloroquine is potentially harmful and no more effective than standard care in treating patients with COVID-19.

‘We have reviewed all the scientific data around hydroxychloroquine and we can now say, definitively, that hydroxychloroquine should not be used as a treatment for anyone with COVID-19,’ he said.

‘There is now sufficient data for us to make a very clear and strong recommendation. In this instance, that is based on data from randomised controlled trials that enrolled nearly 6000 patients.

‘This is a substantial amount of very high-quality scientific data upon which we’ve based the recommendation.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

Awww... is it getting insecure because no one is taking it seriously?

Poor baby...

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

I thought you were ignoring me?

I'm glad you're still paying attention to my posts.

Too easy.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

nice find

Did you read the site with all the recommendation

all the studies linked as evidence - Even the summary has

The vast majority of evidence is from the RECOVERY trial which randomised 4716 hospitalised patients with COVID-19

Which is the trial which gave 4 times the recommended dosage - a

And of the studies it says of the
Certainty of the Evidence (Quality of evidence)
Very Low Due to serious risk of bias and very serious imprecision
Moderate Due to serious risk of bias
Very Low Due to serious risk of bias, very serious imprecision and indirectness

Nothing concrete nothing reliable and would seem Bias is very prevalent.

So back to square 1 WHO to believe - the devil is in the details.

Funny you didn't link to the page with the study information considering your vast deep diving into all pro-hcq sites and news.

You might be more helpful if you stowed your bias and did the deep analysis equally on both sides of the fence.

In the meantime I leave you with the comment from your link with a little bold from me.

Dr Shikha Parmar 9/08/2020 1:13:51 AM

But, the door remains open for prophylaxis – but only post-exposure? There is a currently approved trial to study HCQ for prophylaxis for HCW’s youtu.be... Why contradict this? The basis for prophylaxis being how we understand the virus invades human cells and how HCQ can block this. In addition rheumatologists vehemently defend the safety of HCQ for their patients with autoimmune diseases who aren’t exactly robust individuals. This write-up leaves no scope for ongoing study or use as a mere week-long course in early Covid disease in the community to treat to avert disease progression, its touted benefit by clinicians the world-over who are championing this use. All in all a premature write-up by a taskforce of primary care doctors who are not treating the most sick in whom it’s not a great drug. But who I feel should be asking questions about its possible merit in early disease in the community or in prevention.

a reply to: puzzled2

The basis for prophylaxis being how we understand the virus invades human cells and how HCQ can block this.

It seems that understanding is incorrect. Testing with human cells says it doesn't work.

The researchers decided to conduct their experiments on a human lung cell line called Calu-3 to find out whether chloroquine has the same inhibitory effect here. After all, the novel coronavirus mainly finds its way into the human body via the lungs.

"The virus docks on the cell in the lung, is then activated by the protease TMPRSS2 and can thus enter the cell," explains Hoffmann. While chloroquine shows an inhibitory effect in the monkey cell model, it has no effect on the protease in human lung cells. "Here, it was shown that chloroquine does not prevent the virus from entering the cells," said Pöhlmann.

www.dw.com...


Source Study

a reply to: Southern Guardian

It's like a screaming baby on an airplane... you try to ignore, but the brat just won't shut up.

You must be proud...

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

It's like a screaming baby on an airplane... you try to ignore, but the brat

Pathetic, baby, brat, everthing but the kitchen sink you're throwing there.

Still nothing of substance to contribute to this thread.

Are you really retired?